Calcutta HC reserves order on cattle slaughter; petitioners ask "lifespan of cow is 15 years, how is 14 eligible?"

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday reserved its judgment on a series of petitions challenging the newly formed West Bengal government's stringent notification restricting the slaughter of cows, buffaloes, and calves. Issued ahead of the upcoming Bakri Eid festival, the state Home Department’s directive mandates that no livestock can be sacrificed without a joint "fitness certificate" from local civic heads and government veterinary surgeons. Following intense arguments from both sides, the division bench closed the hearing and postponed its final verdict, leaving the fate of the state’s aggressive implementation of the West Bengal Animal Slaughter Control Act of 1950 hanging in temporary legal limbo.

During the high-stakes proceedings, distinct legal arguments erupted over the feasibility and infrastructure needed to execute the mandate. Senior advocate Vikas Bhattacharya and lawyer Imtiaz Ahmed fiercely questioned how the state plans to determine and enforce the age restriction, given that the guidelines completely bar the slaughter of cattle under 14 years of age. Ahmed pointed out that because the average natural lifespan of a cow is only about 15 years, the 14-year minimum age rule is functionally impractical. Furthermore, the lawyers argued that the state government has completely failed to establish the basic medical infrastructure required for this certification, highlighting a massive shortage of authorized local slaughterhouses and government veterinarians across municipal blocks.

Challenging the constitutional validity of the regulatory framework, senior counsel Vikas Ranjan and advocate Sabyasachi Chatterjee sought an immediate stay on the government notice. The legal team representing the litigants argued that the closure of traditional cattle markets and the strict certification barriers directly infringe upon traditional religious practices and the fundamental beliefs of minority communities. They also emphasized that cattle are no longer used exclusively for agricultural labor in modern times, making the core defensive logic of the 1950 Act outdated. The petitioners demanded that, at the very least, an exemption or amendment should be made to protect citizens who had already purchased livestock for the festival before the surprise guidelines were enacted.

Conversely, advocates supporting the government's intervention pressed for a complete, ironclad prohibition on public cow slaughter during the festival. Lawyer Debyani Sengupta urged the bench to mandate the immediate formation of a dedicated state-wide monitoring committee to strictly regulate the livestock trade and ensure no public sacrifices occur outside designated abattoirs. Pointing to recent census data indicating a 1.3 percent rise in the regional cattle population, proponents of the notification argued that administrative oversight is crucial to prevent illegal smuggling, maintain communal harmony, and stop sanitation hazards in open streets. The High Court's impending ruling is now expected to draw a definitive line between state regulatory powers and the protection of religious freedoms.